Cases 91 - 100 of 133
McIntosh v. Unknown Bexar County Detention Officers et al
as 5:2011cv00702
Defendant:
ARAMARK, Lt. FNU Baldits, Sert Officer FNU Cardenas and others
Plaintiff:
Donald Ray McIntosh
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2011cv03204
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Trustee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Counter_defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cross_claimant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cross_defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0157
Carnes v. Montgomery County Jail et al
as 4:2011cv02420
Plaintiff:
Terry Dale Carnes
Defendant:
Montgomery County Jail, Aramark Co. and Keefe Commissionary Network
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Flanagan v. Holmes et al
as 4:2011cv02422
Plaintiff:
Theodore Flanagan
Defendant:
Ben Holmes and Aramark
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Walter V. Micolta vs. Aramark US Offshore Services, LLC
as 3:2011cv00257
Plaintiff:
Walter Villegas Micolta
Defendant:
Aramark US Offshore Services LLC
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 688
Haywood v. Bexar County Sheriff et al
as 5:2011cv00467
Defendant:
Aramark and/or Food Contractor, Bexar County Sheriff, County of Bexar, Texas and others
Plaintiff:
Erica Haywood
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2011cv02089
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2011cv01984
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Bell v. Nabors Drilling USA LP et al
as 4:2011cv01130
Plaintiff:
Josaiah Bell
Defendant:
Nabors Drilling USA LP , Chevron USA Inc and ARAMARK Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Camarillo v. Armark Corporation d/b/a Aramark US Offshore Division
as 3:2011cv00095
Plaintiff:
Guillermo Camarillo
Defendant:
Aramark US Offshore Services LLC
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 688
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
